jorge,

I loathe Islam. I would not be FOCUSING on Islam if it were not for the threat appeasement posed.

It still sounds as though you are looking for some kind of conflict, stevenlmeyer.

>>But what annoyed me was this statement:

"What is it about the external face of Islam that generates such antipathy amongst the fanatics of a different religion?"

I, as you know, am not at all religious.<<

In which case, it was not aimed at you, was it?

So, with the greatest respect, your taking exception to the question does not provide any form of answer.

It is relatively unusual for an atheist to take such an aggressive stance against a religion, as opposed, of course, to the tiny percentage of nutters who use that religion as some kind of excuse for their actions.

Nevertheless, I have - as I think I made perfectly clear - no time for the feigned offence-taking that is represented by the article in question.

My main concern is with the mental damage that religion causes, turning weak and impressionable individuals into mindless robots.

Like this guy.

"As he prepared to martyr himself by attacking the Holsworthy army base, alleged terrorist Wissam Fattal asked his mother: 'Don't you want paradise? Don't you want your son and yourself to go to paradise to the highest degree?'" (Victorian Supreme Court transcript)

How sick is that.

""As he prepared to martyr himself by attacking the Holsworthy army base, alleged terrorist Wissam Fattal asked his mother:

" 'Don't you want paradise? Don't you want your son and yourself to go to paradise to the highest degree?' (Victorian Supreme Court transcript)

How sick is that." .. Posted by Pericles, Tuesday, 14 September 2010 8:49:38 AM

Exactly. That is the belief that got Richard Dawkin's started on countering religion in the main sphere (as well as his frustration with dealing with creationists as a biologist). Here is the article he wrote 9 years ago, tomorrow.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/sep/15/september11.politicsphilosophyandsociety1

To the author:

I will apologise (entirely against their will)for stevenlmeyer and the other wingnuts who, in their tribal primitivity, confuse the individual and the collective.

I have very rarely read such a lot of horse dookey as is exemplified by some of the the sillier and more massively ignorant responses to this article.

It is a shame these people probably don't get out more. They should be screaming their lungs out, for their team and against the opposition, at the nearest rugby fixture. That's a healthier sort of tribalism. Then they cn move on, to establishing a thoughtful dialogue, face to face, with someone who is not like them.

But my guess is that they are hypnotised by their computer screens, stuck like chooks on chalklines.

Kind regards

sirvivor, what a groveler .. that's up there with geraldine doogue's "we salute you" grovel

this is a problem we seem to find ourselves in, whenever people quite rightly express their opinions, someone like yourself feels they have to run around apologizing .. because you feel there might be some hurt feelings.

the reason you are able to do this freely is because people in your past have NOT tolerated the intolerance of others, see europe WWII, the pacaific war of WWII etc.

apologise for your own weakness, but trying to ingratiate yourself by incessant grovelling is sickening.

we are all entitled to our opinions , you might not like them but need to learn some tolerance yourself, and tolerate other people's opinions.

given the amount of deaths as a result of secularism it is a wonder someone has not used the 'origin of species' as toilet paper. It would be certainly more useful than brainwashing people with its stupidity.